Yes, voters do care about secret cash funding elections!

It has become an article of faith among certain Beltway inside-game commentators that there's no way the Dem attack on secret money funding elections could ever have a prayer of working. Surely the issue is too esoteric, too process-y, and too removed from voter concerns about the economy to resonate.

But a new poll commissioned by MoveOn, and done by the respected non-partisan firm Survey USA, strongly suggests that the issue may indeed matter a good deal to voters after all.

The poll finds that two thirds of registered voters, or 66 percent, are aware that outside groups are behind some of the ads they're seeing. This makes sense, since the issue has dominated the media amid the battle over the huge ad onslaught against Dems funded by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Karl Rove's groups.

What's more, an overwhelming 84 percent say they have a "right to know" who's bankrolling the ads. And crucially, the poll also found that the issue is resonant when linked to the economy. A majority, 53 percent, are less likely to think a candidate who is backed by "anonymous groups" can be trusted to "improve economic conditions" for them or their families. People don't believe these groups are looking out for their interests.

Here are other key findings from the poll, which was provided to me by a MoveOn official:

* An overwhelming 84% of voters polled, including 80% of Republicans and 81% of Independents, believe voters have a right to know who is paying for ads for a particular candidate.

*Fifty-six percent of voters overall (including 53% of Independents) are less likely to vote for a candidate if they know the ads supporting that candidate are paid for anonymous corporations and wealthy donors.

* Forty-seven percent of all voters are more likely to support a candidate who insists that voters have a right to know who is paying for ads, with only 9% of total voters saying they are less likely to support a candidate who holds that position.

*Almost two out of three voters (63%) do not believe that the anonymous groups running ads hold the voters best interest in mind. This belief is held by 65% of Independent and 70% of Democratic voters.

* A straight majority of total voters (53%) are less likely to trust a candidate to improve economic conditions if that candidate is supported by anonymous groups.

The issues poll similiarly among voters in two key states surveyed, Colorado and Illinois.

Now, there's no way of knowing how important the above sentiments will prove to people's final decisions, which are obviously influenced by a host of factors, most overwhelmingly the economy. And surely some will dismiss this poll because it was commissioned by MoveOn.

But keep in mind: Public polling also shows strong voter concern about corporate influence over our elections. A recent Washington Post poll found an overwhelming majority, 80 percent, opposes the Citizens United decision allowing unfettered corporate spending in elections, including strong majorities in both parties. And 72 percent support Congressional checks on corporate (and union) election spending.

At a minimum, there's simply no grounds for asserting that this issue doesn't have a prayer of influencing voters. If anything, the evidence suggests the opposite may be true. Oh, and one other thing: You can actually look up who paid for this poll for MoveOn, because despite what you keep hearing to the contrary, the group does disclose its donors.

If we do not know who is paying for all those attack ads against Democrats only, how will we ever be able to put two and two together, when Republicans start passing legislation for those Secret Sinister Paymasters?

If we are never going to be told, who is paying the bribes, how are we every going to catch the bribe takers?

Yes we DO care! I, for one, am appalled that shadowy anonymous donors are supporting Dems in Nevada and PA!

"The liberal group VoteVets says it's going up with this ad in Nevada in support of Harry Reid, along two ads in Pennsylvania.

"... The group's leadership is made up of veterans, but it makes no claim that its money comes from veterans.

"Indeed, it is, like Crossroads GPS, a non-profit that doesn't have to disclose its donors. Which is to say that Democrats, too, have the infrastructure for this kind of money, even if they're getting buried by it this year."

If the average voter took the time to peruse the internet to get their news there wouldn't even be a discussion about whether the GOP will take over the House.
However, I doubt whether the Dems have enough time left to make the connection for mid term voters that the CofC/GOP DON'T CARE about you. They never have nor ever will.

Under federal election law, coordination between an election campaign and a 527 group is not allowed. The heavy spending of key 527 groups to attack presidential candidates brought complaints to the Federal Elections Commission of illegal coordination between the groups and rival political campaigns. These formal complaints included:

On May 5, 2004, the Republican National Committee accused MoveOn.org, The Media Fund, America Coming Together and America Votes of coordinating their efforts with the John Kerry campaign.
On August 20, 2004, John Kerry's campaign accused Swift Boat Veterans for Truth of coordinating their efforts with the George W. Bush campaign.
Several people who were involved with both organizations removed themselves to avoid the appearance of conflict. Attorney Benjamin Ginsberg pointed out that it was not uncommon or illegal for lawyers to represent campaigns or political parties while also representing 527 groups. For example, Washington attorney Joe Sandler simultaneously represented the Democratic National Committee and a 527 group airing anti-Bush ads, the MoveOn.org Voter Fund.

In 2006 and 2007 the FEC fined a number of organizations, including MoveOn and Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, for violations arising from the 2004 campaign. The FEC's rationale was that these groups had specifically advocated the election or defeat of candidates, thus making them subject to federal regulation and its limits on contributions to the organizations.

Greg, I'd like to see a story about how lazy the NYT and WaPo reporters were in covering this story. Now that we know there is $800,000 in PUBLICLY disclosed funds paid in the Chamber of Commerce by foreign sources, can we get a correction from the reporters? Obviously they didn't try very hard to look into this. Just interviewed the Chamber of Commerce and then shut down their reporting.

TP: One of the interesting things that was discussed in the debate was third-party spending, particularly with the Chamber of Commerce. They’ve been putting up tens of thousands of advertising dollars in the district on your behalf. Are you comfortable with the fact that they refuse to disclose their donors and that many of those are foreign companies and state-backed foreign companies?

GIBBS: Let’s be clear. It’s illegal for them to take donations from foreign nationals, just like it’s illegal in my campaign to do that. There’s absolutely a firewall. They segregate any funds…

TP: So you trust them? Because they’re system, they say they just have a system and just to trust them and their system because they won’t disclose it. You’re willing to trust them?

GIBBS: I wouldn’t have a problem with the Federal Election Commission having the ability – I don’t know if they do or not – to go in and audit them and make sure that they had the firewall.

MoveOn, the advocacy group supporting Barack Obama, has decided to permanently shutter its 527 operation, partly in response to the Illinois Senator's insistence that such groups should not spend on his behalf during the general election, I've learned from the group's spokesperson.

MoveOn's decision, which will dramatically impact the way it raises money on Obama's behalf, is yet another sign of how rapidly Obama is taking control of the apparatus that's gearing up on his behalf.

By shuttering its 527, MoveOn is effectively killing its ability to raise money in huge chunks from labor unions, foundations, and big donors who would give over $5,000.

Karl Rove and The Chamber of Commerce are not running issue ads. They are running attack ads against specific Democratic candidates. That is the difference. They are openly partisan attack ads against specific Democrats. That is whyh people need to know That A Secret Sinister Cabal of Wall St. Robber Barons, are trying to install a Republican Puppet Government, which will take orders only from The Wall St. Robber Barons, and the Companies that want tax breaks for sending production jobs to other countries.

It has become an article of faith among certain Beltway inside-game commentators that there's no way the Dem attack on secret money funding elections could ever have a prayer of working.
==========================

There's nothing new about this, Greg. Remember when everything was good news for Republicans in 2006? Or EXCELLENT News for McCain in 2008?

The fact that they were completely wrong had no effect on their careers (nor did being completely wrong about Iraq, years earlier).

As long as you're spinning for the Plutocrat Party, you'll get to keep your pundit job in D.C.
~

MoveOn.org spent $21,565,803 in 2004 through a 527 that did NOT disclose its contributors.

AND it has been FINED for violating the Federal Campaign rules.

AND just because MoveON changed its status between the primary and the general in 2008, doesn't mean it disclosed everything in 2008 either.

Instead, the $700 MILLION went DIRECTLY to Obama's campaign through QUESTIONABLE CREDIT CARD MACHINES.

This is getting ridiculous - first you want to slam Christine O'Donnell because she attended a class on Oxford campus, but the class was run by another Institute - but we get this story about MoveOn.org.

[Former employee] Kapusta also testified that once a lender referred a case to Stern's firm, any later payments by the homeowner were simply ignored:

Q: What if a homeowner made payment?

A: That was never there.

Q: If that happened, it was never reflected.

A: No.

Kapusta added that she was "yelled at" for trying to talk to homeowners on the phone. "You're giving them too much time," she said she was told. "Everything was about getting the judgment entered because we have to report back to the banks."

The Gang Of Five Right Wing Activists on the Supreme Court provided a way for a Secret Sinister Cabal of Robber Barons to launder their bribes to Republicans, by using Karl Rove and The Chamber Of Con Artists as middle men.

"The Gang Of Five Right Wing Activists on the Supreme Court provided a way for a Secret Sinister Cabal of Robber Barons to launder their bribes to Republicans, by using Karl Rove and The Chamber Of Con Artists as middle men."

You're d*mn right we care!! - and apparently 84% of the public agrees with Pres. Obama's opposition to the farrrr right extremist Roberts' Court that gave the keys to our democracy to corporations and billionaires!!

At the end of the day, the Washington Post is heavily, heavily dependent on the advertising money that comes from the Chamber of Commerce, and so they and other media outlets can't afford to shine light on these issues.

And lest we even temporarily lose sight of the true aim, here it is once again:

"One in four dollars raised by Daniel M. Donovan Jr., the Republican candidate for New York attorney general, can be traced to a $17 billion hedge fund whose chief executive has emerged as a staunch and influential defender of Wall Street this election year, campaign records show. The scale of the donations from those tied to the fund, Elliott Management, is striking because outside of the federal government, perhaps no single office has as much power to police the financial industry as New York’s attorney general."

And THAT My Friends is what it is all about for the GOP, Conservatives, and Big Business. Control the government and let the SuperRich run wild and trample the American Middle Class. The Chamber of Commerce, like Fox, is merely a transport vehicle.

The Chamber’s anti-American jobs agenda serves not only the profit-seeking of right-wing corporate executives in the United States, but also works to send jobs overseas to the following outsourcing companies, who are some of the dozens of foreign corporations that pay member dues to the Chamber of Commerce’s 501c(6) account, which is used to fund its political ads:

Do you remember John J. Dilulio, the former Bush administration guy, saying the following, "What you've got is everything--and I mean everything--being run by the political arm. It's the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis."

Rover doesn't care about policy at all, the only thing that matters is politics and winning. Lie, steal, cheat and do whatever it takes to win, that is Karl Rove.

"Taking foreign money" does NOT constitute "treason." I hate it when anyone trots out the "treason" charge.

There is only one crime defined in the Constitution: treason. In fact, the Constitution defines not only the crime, but the minimum proof needed to convict someone of treason:

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

"As treason may be committed against the United States, the authority of the United States ought to be enabled to punish it. But as new-fangled and artificial treasons have been the great engines by which violent factions, the natural offspring of free government, have usually wreaked their alternate malignity on each other, the convention have, with great judgment, opposed a barrier to this peculiar danger, by inserting a constitutional definition of the crime, fixing the proof necessary for conviction of it, and restraining the Congress, even in punishing it, from extending the consequences of guilt beyond the person of its author."

Please don't do what the Bushies did, and howl "treason" at every action of the conservatives.

A poll taken by an organization funded by undisclosed donors, to see if the public is concerned about organizations funded by undisclosed donors....

Yet the author trys to make it sound like this is something new the republicans just came up with? ? ? . . .

Ridiculous... MoveON was one of the first such organizations and it is left leaning and funds democrats. Remember it started out to support President Bill Clinton during his sex scandel(s).. Hence the name MoveON.

""One in four dollars raised by Daniel M. Donovan Jr., the Republican candidate for New York attorney general, can be traced to a $17 billion hedge fund whose chief executive has emerged as a staunch and influential defender of Wall Street this election year, campaign records show. The scale of the donations from those tied to the fund, Elliott Management, is striking because outside of the federal government, perhaps no single office has as much power to police the financial industry as New York’s attorney general."

And THAT My Friends is what it is all about for the GOP, Conservatives, and Big Business. Control the government and let the SuperRich run wild and trample the American Middle Class. The Chamber of Commerce, like Fox, is merely a transport vehicle."

Bingo! This story resonates because it IS about the economy. It directly correlates to what the financial future is going to be for 98% of the American public if the GOP and their corporate cronies succeed in buying this election.

Maybe everyone who was sampled in this poll hasn't completely made the connection to the future of their own personal financial situation but clearly they are beginning to see the big picture.

My highlighting this story is probably some form of "propaganda". The story itself is, I'm sure, entirely neutral. With that out of the way, Barry is going to give a speech in Mumbai post mid-term election. The final paragragh of the article is perhaps the most interesting:

"The U.S.-India Business Council, formed in 1975 to advance commercial ties between the world’s two largest free-market democracies, is hosted under the aegis of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the world's largest business federation representing more than 3 million businesses and organizations of every size, sector and region."

That's the message a piece of direct mail sent out by the National Campaign for an Impeachment Inquiry, a project of The Conservative Caucus, which is calling -- as their name would suggest -- for the impeachment of President Barack Obama.

Why you ask? Well, for one, there's "ObamaCare," which TCC brands as an effort to "control the people." Also, Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro like Obama and his "march of America toward Socialism, or worse."

The flyer, obtained by TPMMuckraker, includes a "national ballot of 5,000,000 registered voters" on "Whether Congress Should Launch An Impeachment Inquiry Into President Barack Hussein Obama's Assault On Our Constitution."

Voters care more about lying. Lying is very important to the voters. Especially if the lying is coming from Obama. Secret cash. Where is this secret cash? Since when is a lie a bases and the foundation of the truth. The so called lie bas been the foundation of the ads the Democrats have had for years and years and yet no Republican ever said a word. Now that the money for ads against the Democrats isn't coming from Soros, it's a problem. Let's not have double standards shall we. What's good for the left is good for the right.

the poll data is in my mind useless. The problem is simple, the questions are leading.

by mentioning things like "masking" the pollsters are raising a concern that the respondent may not have even considered.

I have the same concern with the question about rights. Since most repondents stated that they didn't think ads would change their minds (65%), I doubt they paid much attention to the entire "disclosure" issue. the question raises the issue and therefore distorts the answers.

These are leading questions. Once again we see the Democrats waving a bright shiny object in the face of the electorate in the hopes that this will distract us from the mess they've made.

BTW: Last time I checked in the United States people (including corporations) were protected by certain inallienable rights as set forth in the Bill Of Rights.

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Do you honestly believe it is correct for the President of The United States to proclaim publically that a person or corporation should be searched or investigated or warrants issued when no evidence exists, and no person has made a sworn statement that they have knowledge of an offense? BTW: The law does not consider a blog comment a sworn statement, especially not when the blogger never worked for that organization.

I think that we should expect the President to uphold the law(s) of our land rather than proclaim soneones guilt with no evidence... don't you think?

It very well could be that Alaska's three-way Senate contest is more of a contest than Florida's three-way. Consider: Scott McAdams (D) has raised a significant amount of money by Alaska standards ($685,000 in the past quarter) and his ads are compelling (the Hulk tie and the Inouye endorsement were interesting tributes to Ted Stevens); Joe Miller (R) hasn't been running a very good race (see: his press conference announcing that he wouldn't take questions about his past); and there is uncertainty (anecdotally from folks in the Anchorage business community) that Lisa Murkowski can't win a write-in campaign. In fact, the McAdams fundraising surge (again, by Alaska standards) may be evidence that some in Anchorage biz community are their hedging bets. Bottom line: Don't be surprised if we begin to see a McAdams surge, or if we begin to see some outside groups jump and, well, muck around.

As the November elections approach, House Republican leaders are trying to capitalize on public dislike of the new health-care law - about half of voters oppose it - by vowing to "repeal and replace" it. But that's a risky approach for individual GOP candidates, warns Republican pollster Bill McInturff, a partner of Public Opinion Strategies, a national political and public affairs survey research firm. The reason: Many people already are enjoying some popular new benefits, which include allowing adult children to remain on parents' policies until the age of 26 and a prohibition on insurers' rescinding coverage when people get sick.

An outfit that runs a controversial Christian boardinghouse for members of Congress looks to have taken money from an organization that federal prosecutors have accused of funding Islamic terrorism. And a group of Ohio pastors wants the feds to get involved.

Clergy Voice, a progressive activist group, has asked the IRS to probe whether the Fellowship, a secretive Christian organization best known for hosting the National Prayer Breakfast each year, illegally received $50,000 from the Islamic American Relief Agency in 2004. That year, the Senate Finance Committee put the IARA on a list of terror financiers. As a tax-exempt entity, the Fellowship is barred from dealing with such groups.

In an interview with the Washington Post, the Fellowship's president, Richard Carver, appeared to acknowledge that his group had accepted the money

You must be one of those elite few taxpayers who make over $250,000 per year. I guess you're scared that you might soon have to pay your taxes at the same rate that you did when Ronald Reagan was President.

This foreclosure fraud scheme is interesting in a couple of ways. Number one we're hearing a lot of the usual suspects try to pass it off as a technical snafu and also try to quiet the thing down because we wouldn't want the banks to be threatened by their own malfeasance.

And number two, this time they didn't just mess with the homeowners they're foreclosing on, they've messed with a lot of investors on the back end of the deals. Some of these individuals and groups won't take too kindly to being hoodwinked and have a lot more clout than us regular folks.

Early in the debate, O'Donnell told the audience, "He paid $53,000 in a men's fashion show."

[...]

The genesis of O'Donnell's claim seems to be on the blog Freedomist.com, where Pennsylvania writer Paul Collier posted a document labeled "FY 2008 Community Events From County Executive Contingency Fund."

The document shows an expenditure of $53,000 to Our Youth, Inc., for a "men of style fashion show / reception." It also shows $52,500 to the AFL-CIO for a banquet, which O'Donnell also referenced in the debate, saying "He paid another more than $50,000 to appease liberal special interest groups."

[...]

"The five should be a dollar sign," the county executive spokeswoman, Angie Basiouny, told TPM. Other numbers cited on Collier's doc -- $5,600 for a golf tournament, $5,180 for a crab feast -- are only $600 and $180, respectively, according to the official government documents.

This is great - the more Obama, the Dems and the Post whine about the money the GOP and their allies have collected, the more money these groups get! Keep Whining Dems, in 19 days you will be put out of your misery once and for all.

"...Democrats have received $482 million, or 53%, of the $911 million donated to all congressional candidates and political parties from corporate political-action committees or individuals who work for companies, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. Democrats have also collected 93% of the $49 million donated by labor unions."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704164004575548451695013866.html?KEYWORDS=center+for+responsive+politics#printMode

It is what it is...Aka: Mother's Milk.

The issue that CU "opened the floodgates" and the dark, nefarious, corporate types are bankrolling the GOP plot for the {{{giggle}}} end of democracy is, uh, insulting to non-rubes, but apparently effective as the dickens to libs in a PT Barnum sorta way.

maybe unions should spent a percentage of their money they spend on ads on dems and a percentage on republicans...
they can ask those that contribute which side they want they money spent on...
thats fair...
isn't it...

That political hacks trapped inside the beltway would feel "voters don't care about secret funding of election campaigns" is kinda silly. Maybe those hacks only pay attention to the big campaign contributors?

This kind of world-view could be interpretted as disrepectful of working-class voters. It strains the democratic relationship: voters and their elected officials (aka Public Servants).

Also, this narrative strains the basic message of the Tea Party: take back our country. I am not a Tea Party proponent, but to me the "take back our country" means campaign finance reform. Putting some restraints on the corporate funding of election campaigns.

Two hundred years ago, some founding fathers were plantation owners and used slave labor. I assume that Tea Party does not propose a return to slave labor, when they want to honor the founding fathers.

A serious question that has nothing to do with whether foreign funds are being funnelled into the 2010 campagin. Why do conservative Republicans, with a long history of fighting communism, tolerate the U.S. Chamber of Commerce accepting donations from Chinese state owned or controlled businesses? And please don't try to tell me the Chinese government or military is not involved with these businesses.

The issue is whether or not this "concern" will translate into influencing any voting behavior on voting day.

My guess is, not much at all. It is much easier to be mesmerized by the constant noise of the Republican/Chamber of Commerce noise machine and its various tools such as the Tea Party, with its billionaire bankrollers.

"FACT: Unions are required by federal LABOR law to disclose all donations and donors. Why do Fox & Frightwing radio keep their followers dumbed down with lies? Posted by: angie12106"

Because their audience wants fiction they like to hear over truth that they dislike.

Beck and Limbaugh don't dumb down their audience, they let their audience be just as dumb as they want to be and make incredible profits from it.

When you can get your audience to be really stupid because it makes them feel good, and thus buy any product you shill for, from republican orthodoxy to gold futures, you are in media Valhalla. feed em stupidity and life off the profits.

So Republicans and people like Glen Beck are trying to convince the American people that the Chamber of Commerce is made up of small businesses. My question then becomes why are they spending so much money on a political campaign rather than giving the money to the small businesses so they can hire people? Why have they donated so much money to the Chamber of Commerce who is then spending the money on trying to get Republicans elected but whining how they need tax cuts to help them create jobs? I mean if they have such obscene amounts of money to give to the Chamber of Commerce to elect Republicans then they should have enough money to pay decent wages, health insurance cost and hire people for their businesses.

As citizens who will be affected by the next congress, we have a right and duty to know which congressmen and congresswomen are being bought and by whom. If we're going to get screwed, we should at least know who is ramming it home.

I'm just ever so amused that NOW this becomes a big issue to the Dems since it appears they are on the losing side of this cash collection. I don't recall any outrage from them when it was running in their favour a couple of very short years back.

I don't like it when either party whines and cries about what the other side is doing when we all know they've both been doing it for as long as there have been political cash contributions.

So get over it, China, Cuba and the big bad North Koreans aren't funding the repubs. Do both sides take the cash with an outstretched hand? Of course.

I'm more concerned with Axelrod and Obama's accusations about Rove spending foreign cash on the elections without any proof whatsoever. Even the NYT called them on it and said it was a baseless attack. As a result, both Axe and Obama seem petty and small.

Until both sides get serious about changing the money game, none of this is going to change. Next cycle it will likely be the other side screaming like little girls at a pop show about how evil the practice is and how it should be controlled.

OK, go ahead and call me cynical, but I gotta wonder how nice it would be to actually have some adults in charge in DC. These are serious times and we need serious leaders.

The Demonrat Party raised $400 million in 2008 that ended up not being traced back to its source----$400 million. And lil Ezra JournoList Klein in today's WaPo disagrees with Schlumperei Sargent. My money's on Klein......!

Greg, This is the worst sort of polling and you should learn to tell the difference. The poll only asked about 1 thing, campaign finance, so there is nothing to compare the results to, and for this reason, no value in these results.

This type of survey question, “If I tell you something bad about a candidate would you be more or less likely to vote for them?” will always produce a “less likely” result, the real question is compared to what? How does this message stack up against a credible economic message. And 80% of voters will say they have a *right to know* just about anything. Please tell us when you see a poll where voters say who is paying for campaign ads is more important to them than who can get the economy moving. Your readers need for you to separate the good information from the bad, today’s grade: FAIL.

All of these issues — every last one of them — are driven and directed through the corridors of Washington DC by the so-called "invisible hand." Those who MAKE it happen benefit from it directly. Those who LET it happen believe the Super-Lotto-Jackpot fantasy that they too will one day be fabulously wealthy.

The original Tea Partiers are now lamenting the fact that their "fiscally responsible" movement has been overtaken by cultural conservatives. This is the only way in which the Tea Party movement is similar to the Founding Fathers they contend to worship. In a short amount of time they have seen their ideology swallowed whole by the greedy, the unhinged, and the duplicitous.

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.